Ken Rockwell has images from his Yosemite trip with the M9 up here.
Some with the .DNG originals.
I must say that the images from ISO800 on look really blotchy viewed at 100%. So noise at higher ISOs is definitively an issue.

Their analysis reveals that the D3x and M9 share similar characteristics of the sensor apart from a huge advantage of the D3x in dynamic range.
That surprises me. From the M9 testshots I've seen I would have guessed that its SNR beyond ISO 800 is dismal. Only when you switch to "print" the D3x pulls slightly ahead of the M9 in SNR.
There is also a slight advantage in color sensitivity for the D3x.

There's an interesting article by Jack Perkins (here) in which he describes his move from medium format and DSLRs, including most recently the Canon EOS 7D, to a Leica M9 for use in landscape photography rather than the more usually touted use of such a camera in street photography. Worth a read but to get you started here's a quote:

What I early discovered was that these luscious Leica lenses have a different way of rendering. The Leica-look, aficionados call it. Some of the shots I made principally as throwaway tests to my surprise appealed to me, so beautifully were they drawn on the sensor...As a photographer, I am energized, revived.

Since looking for a more compact camera to compliment my 7D I have been looking more and more into Leica and am now even considering selling the 7D and going Leica all the way. Somehow Leica makes more sense to me.

I believe the rendering is indeed different. It is also very hard to put your finger on. Like a glass of really good Scotch (I'm not a wine drinker ), there is something there but most people miss it. I also think that the type of shooting is more fun for certain types of photographers who enjoy slow paced shooting (note: I mean the number of pictures taken, not the speed at which a picture is taken such as 'decisive moment' photography) and an intimate realtionship with the camera itself.

Now to convince Santa that an M9 with a 35 and 50 Summilux is a great gift this winter.

I was just kidding a bit, the M9 won't happen this year. By the end of the year there should be enough money in the bank for me to do it (M9, 35 and 50 lux), but I don't think my wife of two weeks would remain my wife much longer if I cancelled our very special, saving up for an extra year, honeymoon.

What I am going to look for is either an M6 or maybe an M8. The M8 would probably require me to sell the 7D. That wasn't something I planned on, but I haven't used it in a while now because I didn't feel like dragging it along with me. With an M6 I could keep the 7D but not have the digital workflow and film is (Steve Huff just told me) expensive to shoot.

I haven't decided yet what would be the best choice for me. I just have the feeling that I'm not a DSLR shooter anymore. If I switch to Leica and it works, then I'm sure the M9 will come in the not too distant future. For now I'm taking smaller steps.

When I think about it. It would be really good though to have the Leica when we go on our honeymoon. While traveling with an Orient Express train through Scotland, a Leica M would be the perfect camera.

A G11 would be great, but it's not just the size. A Leica M is a different way of shooting. It's compact, it's discreet, but it's also manual and slow paced.

I can't really explain it, but I always thought that having a semi-pro DSLR that would put size and weight in my hands would give me the right feeling when shooting. But I now feel that there is too much going on to give me the feeling of control. That's why I'm considering an M6 or M8 before going for an M9. It's a compromise, but at least I'll be able to try out a new type of photography sooner.

The frame lines in the viewfinder are now illuminated by red LEDs so the window beside the viewfinder is absent. Some will like the look but few will get the opportunity to hold it let alone buy it, particularly as the whole caboodle (camera, lens, storybook, lens shade with four blades) will cost €22,000.

It seems that the frame lines themselves are still generated by a mechanical frame mask so the only technical innovations here seem to be that Leica has been able to commission the necessary metal-work in titanium and it has figured out how to use some LEDs instead of daylight.

Maybe I'm being overly harsh but I'm underwhelmed. Great excuse for a party perhaps but where is the forward thinking here? Good grief, Fujifilm have offered us a whole raft of innovations with the FinePix X100 which make the Leica X1 look positively ho-hum (yes, I know the X1 and M9 are different animals) and today we get treated to a bunch of Leica executives with foolish grins on their faces ( http://twitpic.com/2qe416 ) for having achieved exactly what?

OK, that's me on Leica's black-list but I really do worry for their future if this is the best they can do together with a few re-badged Panasonics.

Some interesting thoughts about Leica rangefinders and film versus digital together with an assessment of the Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH can be found at the BJP article Leica M9: Extended range. Mind you, for around €10,000 an M9 plus the 35mm f/1.4 should be good so it's just as well it is!